REJI M. G v. MAHINDRA HOME FINANCE

MAHINDRA HOME FINANCE MAHINDRA RURAL HOUSING FINANCE LTD., UNIT NO. 203, AMITI BUILDING, PIRAMAL AGASTYA CORPORATE PARK, OPP. FIRE BRIGADE STATION, KAMANI JUNCTION, LBS MAIN ROAD, KURLA (WEST) MUMBAI, REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY., PIN – 400 070. AUTHORISED OFFICER MAHINDRA HOME FINANCE, MAHINDRA RURAL HOUSING FINANCE LTD., UNIT NO. 203, AMITI BUILDING, PIRAMAL AGASTYA CORPORATE PARK, OPP. FIRE BRIGADE STATION, KAMANI JUNCTION, LBS MAIN ROAD, KURLA (WEST) MUMBAI., PIN – 400 070. BY ADVS. M.A.JOSEPH MANAVALAN JAMES JOSE(K/002035/2023) JOSEPH C.J.(K/3425/2022) K.MADHUSOODANAN THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 04.03.2024, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: W.P.(C) No.8522 of 2024 : 2 : JUDGMENT Dated this the 4th day of March, 2024 The petitioner has approached this Court aggrieved by the coercive proceedings for recovery of financial advance made by the Mahindra Home Finance to the petitioner, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002.

The respondents paid 1,87,798/- to the petitioner ₹ as Housing Loan in the year 2018. The petitioner states that though the petitioner made remittances promptly during the initial repayment period of the financial advance, he could not pay the repayment instalments promptly later. The repayment of loan fell into arrears later due to Covid-19 pandemic and financial difficulties. It happened due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner. W.P.(C) No.8522 of 2024 : 3 :

Though the petitioner requested the respondents to permit the petitioner to repay the overdue amounts in easy monthly instalments, the respondent authorities were not yielding. The authorities, instead, started coercive proceedings, invoking the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002 and the Security Interest (Enforcement) Rules, 2002 and issued Ext.P2 notice.

The petitioner states that he is still in a position to clear the overdue amounts towards the loan, if sufficient time is given to clear the dues in easy monthly instalments. If the respondents are permitted to continue with the coercive proceedings and auction the secured assets provided by the petitioner, he will be put to untold hardship and loss.

Standing Counsel entered appearance on behalf of the respondents and denied all the statements made by the petitioner. On behalf of the respondents, it is submitted that the loan was given to the petitioner in the year 2018. The petitioner committed default in repaying the loan. W.P.(C) No.8522 of 2024 : 4 :

The respondents repeatedly reminded the petitioner and required him to clear the dues. The petitioner deliberately omitted to do so. In the circumstances, the respondents had no other go than to proceed against the petitioner invoking, the provisions of the Securitisation and Reconstruction of Financial Assets and Enforcement of Security Interest Act, 2002. The impugned Ext.P2 was issued in these circumstances. The petitioner has not advanced any legal reasons to thwart the coercive proceedings initiated by the respondents.

The Standing Counsel, however, submitted that if the petitioner is ready and willing to make a substantial payment soon and remit the balance overdue amount immediately thereafter, a short breathing time can be granted to the petitioner to clear the dues. The Standing Counsel submitted that the outstanding amount due to the respondents from the petitioner is 1,25,159/- and the ₹ overdue amount is 41,318/-. ₹ W.P.(C) No.8522 of 2024 : 5 :

I have heard the learned Counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel representing the respondents.

The specific case of the petitioner is that the petitioner has been making the repayment and maintaining the loan account initially. The default in repayment of the loan account occurred lately due to reasons beyond the control of the petitioner. The petitioner has provided substantial security which will safeguard the interest of the respondents.

In the facts and circumstances of the case, I am inclined to dispose of the writ petition giving a short and reasonable time to the petitioner to clear off his liability.

The writ petition is therefore disposed of with the following directions: (i) The petitioner shall remit an amount of ₹ 10,000/- on or before 27.03.2024 and balance overdue amount in subsequent W.P.(C) No.8522 of 2024 : 6 : consecutive eight equal monthly instalments thereafter, along with accruing interest and other administrative charges, if any. (ii) If the petitioner commits single default in making payments as directed above, the respondents will be at liberty to continue with coercive proceedings against the petitioner in accordance with law. (iii) The petitioner shall also pay current EMIs along with the aforesaid payments. (iv) If the petitioner pays the instalments as directed above, any coercive proceedings against the petitioner shall stand deferred. AMR Sd/- N. NAGARESH JUDGE W.P.(C) No.8522 of 2024 : 7 : APPENDIX OF WP(C) 8522/2024 PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS Exhibit P1 Exhibit P2 Exhibit P3 A TRUE COPY OF THE DISCHARGE CARD ISSUED BY THE MEDICAL COLLEGE HOSPITAL, GANDINAGAR, KOTTAYAM. A TRUE COPY OF THE NOTICE DTD. 18/12/2023 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT IN THE NAME OF THE PETITIONER. A TRUE COPY OF THE REPRESENTATION DTD. 17/1/2024 SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE RESPONDENTS.